The Congressman's letter reported in the
article below had been provided to Forum participants earlier that day,
and is available from a link above the Forum report that defined the legal
questions and communication issues relevant to investors:

Earlier in May, Mr. Ackman's Pershing Square Capital Management LP
said he would pursue a nonbinding vote of Allergan shareholders,
hoping to pressure Allergan to negotiate with Valeant, whose advances
it has so far spurned. Valeant on Wednesday raised its bid to about
$49 billion, which Allergan said it would consider.

Pershing Square, which is teaming with Valeant on the bid, is holding
the referendum outside of Allergan's typical corporate election
procedures. Allergan has pledged to all but ignore the vote.

In a letter dated Tuesday, Rep. Edward Royce (R., Calif.) expressed
concerns about the referendum to SEC Chairman
Mary Jo White,
saying the "strategy being used in this case could make it difficult
for shareholders to truly understand what is occurring."

Mr. Royce's district includes areas just north of Irvine, Calif.,
where Allergan is based. A political-action committee, or PAC,
associated with Allergan gave $5,000 to Mr. Royce's 2014 campaign,
according to Open Secrets, which tracks political donations.

"This is the first shadow shareholder referendum of its kind filed at
the SEC, and it's at the expense of shareholder transparency," Mr.
Royce said in a statement Wednesday. "My immediate concern is that the
SEC performs a thorough review of the details of this filing with that
transparency in mind. Allergan's investors and the U.S. capital
markets deserve nothing less."

The SEC is expected to review the proxy materials Pershing Square has
filed. An agency spokesman declined to comment.

Mr. Ackman defended his effort Wednesday.

"There is nothing more transparent than a vote of the shareholders
under the SEC's proxy rules," Mr. Ackman said in an interview.

Valeant Chief Executive Michael Pearson said Wednesday at a
presentation to investors and analysts that Allergan was "sure
spending an awful lot of time trying to get [the referendum] outlawed
and not to happen." He didn't elaborate.

An Allergan spokesman said the referendum was "a self-serving
exercise" and declined to comment on Mr. Royce's letter or Mr.
Pearson's remark.

Separately, a bipartisan group of lawmakers urged antitrust regulators
to look closely at the proposed merger, saying it could have
"significant anticompetitive consequences" for patients and doctors.

In a letter Tuesday to the Federal Trade Commission, the group — three
Democrats and five Republicans — said the deal, which would grow
Valeant's market share for certain skin- and eye-care products,
including wrinkle-reducer Botox, could lead to price increases.

"The consolidation of market share in Valeant may allow it to drive up
prices for consumers and patients while limiting product options," the
letter said.

On Wednesday, Valeant announced it would sell the rights to a suite of
skin-care products to
Nestle SA to help ease
antitrust concerns.

The lawmakers also said Valeant could gut Allergan's spending on
research and development. Allergan spent 17% of its revenue on R&D
last year, compared with 3% at Valeant, which typically focuses on
acquiring late stage drugs, rather than developing new ones.

This Forum program is open, free of charge,
to anyone concerned with investor interests in the
development of marketplace standards for expanded access to
information for securities valuation and shareholder voting
decisions. As stated
in the posted
Conditions of Participation, the
Forum's purpose is to provide decision-makers with access to
information and a free exchange of views on the issues
presented in the program's Forum
Summary. Each
participant is expected to make independent use of
information obtained through the Forum, subject to the
privacy rights of other participants. It is a Forum
rule that participants will not be identified or quoted
without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated to address
issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings"
program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace
practices, rather than investor decisions relating to only a
single company. The Forum may therefore invite program
support of several companies that can provide both expertise
and examples of leadership relating to the issues being
addressed.

The information provided to
Forum participants is intended for their private reference,
and permission has not been granted for the republishing of
any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web
site is the responsibility of
Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™
is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the
programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to
decision-making information. It should be noted that we have
no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial
Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's
2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering
with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked
Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our
support or endorsement.